NATO
packs it in; Turkey on the verge of a nervous breakdownBy Thierry Meyssan

October 16, 2012 "Information
Clearing House"
- On October 8, the Collective Security Treaty
Organization (CTSO) began maneuvers dubbed "Inviolable
Fraternity" ("НЕРУШИМОЕ БРАТСТВО"). The scenario focuses on the
deployment of a peace force in an imaginary country where
international jihadists and terrorist organizations operate
against a backdrop of ethnic and confessional divisions. The
accredited diplomatic corps, which was invited to attend the
exercises, listened attentively to the opening address of the
deputy secretary general of the organization. He clearly
indicated that the CTSO is preparing for an eventual
intervention in the Greater Middle East. And for those feigning
deafness, Nikolai Bordyuzha specified that his deputy was not
speaking of Afghanistan.

The Geneva Declaration negotiated by Kofi Annan on June 30
foresaw the deployment of a peace force if the Syrian government
and the opposition jointly made the demand. The Free Syrian Army
rejected the accord. The term "opposition" refers only to the
political parties who have been meeting since in Damascus, under
the aupices of the Russian and Chinese ambassadors. As the
Geneva Accord was validated by the Security Council, the
deployment of the "blue chapkas" can be set in motion without
requiring an ad hoc resolution. Valery Semerikov stated that
4,000 men had already been enlisted in the Peace Force with
46,000 others in the wings available for the rapid mobilization.

With this as background, the signs of Western retreat from Syria
are multiplying. The influx of Western arms and combatants is
drying up except for the ongoing transfers funded by Saudi
Arabia and Qatar.

Even more surprising: on six successive occasions, the NATO
Command at Incirlik gave jihadists instructions to regroup
within specified zones to prepare for huge offensives. While the
Syrian Arab Army, which was formed to confront the Israeli Army,
may be ill-adapted for guerilla warfare, it is highly effective
in conventional combat. In each of these engagements, it easily
encircled and wiped out the assembled units of the Free Syrian
Army. Though the initial defeats suffered by the jihadists could
have been attributed to a tactical error or to an incompetent
commander, after the sixth debacle another hypothesis must be
considered: that NATO is willingly sending these combatants to
their deaths.

In contrast to popular perceptions, the motivation of the
jihadists is not, properly speaking, ideological or religious
but rather, aesthetic. They are not looking to die for a cause
and are not focused on the future of Jerusalem. They strike a
romantic posture and seek to intensify their sensations whether
through drugs or through death. Their behavior makes them easy
to manipulate; they seek extreme situations which they are then
placed in, and their movements are totally steered. Over the
last years, Prince Bandar bin Sultan became the leading
architect of these assemblages, including those of al-Qaeda. He
supplied them with preachers promising a paradise where seventy
virgins would provide them with ecstatic pleasures not if they
accomplished a particular military or political feat but only if
they died as martyrs wherever Bandar had need for them.

It seems Prince Bandar has disappeared from the scene since the
attack on him on July 26. He may well be dead. From Morroco to
Xinjiang, the jihadists have been left to their own devices,
without any real coordination. They could be recruited by any
number of actors, as the recent assassination of the U.S.
Ambassador in Libya confirms. As a result, Washington wants to
unload this risky and burdensome rabble or at the very least
reduce their number. The orders that NATO gives to the jihadists
are designed to expose them to fire by the Syrian Arab Army
which is eliminating them en masse.

Recently, the French police killed a French Salafist who
attacked a Jewish business establishment. The investigation that
followed revealed that he belonged to a network including
individuals that had gone to do jihad in Syria. The British
police made a similar discovery four days later.

The message from Paris and London is that the French and British
killed in Syria were not agents on a secret mission but fanatics
who acted on their own initiative. This is obviously false
because certain of these jihadists were carrying communication
instruments of NATO specification, supplied by France and the
United Kingdom. Whatever the case, these events are marking the
end of the Franco-British involvement alongside the Free Syrian
Army, while Damascus discretely exchanges its prisoners. A page
has been turned.

Under the circumstances, one can understand the frustration of
Turkey and the Wahhabist monarchies who at the request of the
Alliance invested in the secret war unreservedly, but who now
must assume alone the failure of the operation. Going for broke,
Ankara threw itself into a series of provocations designed to
prevent NATO from pulling out. Anything goes, from the firing of
Turkish artillery into Syrian territory to the pirating of a
civil airline. But these gestures are counterproductive.

Specifically, the Syrian air plane coming from Moscow which was
turned around by Turkish fighters contained no weapons but
rather high-explosive detection equipment to be used for the
protection of civilians. Turkey, actually, did not seek to
prevent Russia from delivering material aimed at protecting
Syrian civilians from terrorism but aimed instead to increase
tension by mistreating the Russian passangers and refusing to
allow their ambassador to render assistance. Wasted effort: NATO
did not react to the imaginary accusations put forward by Recep
Tayip Erdogan. The only consequence is that President Putin has
postponed sine die his visit to Ankara originally scheduled for
the first half of December.

There is a long way still to go on the path to peace. But even
if Turkey now or the Wahhabist monarchies later attempt to
prolong the war, a process has been set in motion. NATO is
packing up and the media are turning their gaze to other
horizons.
Thierry Meyssan, founder and chairman of Voltaire Network and
the Axis for Peace Conference. Professor of International
Relations at the Centre for Strategic Studies in Damascus. His
columns specializing in international relations feature in daily
newspapers and weekly magazines in Arabic, Spanish and Russian.

In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)